Pressure sores and wound care: when might poor care be negligent?
How risk assessments, repositioning, equipment, wound monitoring and escalation may be reviewed when a pressure sore causes avoidable harm.
Read article →Pressure sores and wound complications can sometimes develop despite appropriate care. A claim may require investigation where risk, repositioning, skin checks, nutrition, equipment, infection or deterioration were not managed reasonably and avoidable harm followed.
A poor outcome alone does not prove negligence. The investigation considers what a reasonably competent healthcare professional should have done and whether any failure made a material difference to the outcome.
This can justify investigation depending on the clinical circumstances, available evidence and harm caused.
This can justify investigation depending on the clinical circumstances, available evidence and harm caused.
This can justify investigation depending on the clinical circumstances, available evidence and harm caused.
This can justify investigation depending on the clinical circumstances, available evidence and harm caused.
This can justify investigation depending on the clinical circumstances, available evidence and harm caused.
This can justify investigation depending on the clinical circumstances, available evidence and harm caused.
A pressure sore is not automatically evidence of negligence. The assessment considers the person’s clinical risks, mobility, skin condition and the preventative steps that were reasonably required.
Concerns may justify review where known risks were not assessed, prevention plans were not followed or deterioration was not acted on promptly.
Responsibility may pass between a hospital, GP, district nursing service and care provider. Records and handovers can help establish who was responsible at each stage and whether care was coordinated appropriately.
Independent evidence may be needed to assess whether different care would probably have prevented the sore, limited its severity or reduced infection, pain, treatment and recovery time.
Relevant evidence depends on the circumstances. Common sources include:
The evidence is considered alongside the chronology and appropriate independent expert opinion.
The evidence is considered alongside the chronology and appropriate independent expert opinion.
The evidence is considered alongside the chronology and appropriate independent expert opinion.
The evidence is considered alongside the chronology and appropriate independent expert opinion.
Read about prevention, treatment, evidence and when poor care may require investigation.
See how care records, photographs and independent evidence may be used.
Begin with a short, confidential initial enquiry.
Tell us what happened, when the treatment took place and how you were affected.
The key facts, limitation position and whether further investigation may be appropriate are considered.
Relevant medical records, chronology and evidence of any financial losses may be obtained.
Appropriate independent experts may address breach of duty, causation, condition and prognosis.
Where the evidence supports a claim, the relevant defendant can be notified and liability or settlement discussed.
The matter may conclude by agreement or, where necessary, through the court process.
There is no reliable generic calculator for medical negligence. Where liability is established, compensation can reflect the individual injury and financial consequences supported by evidence.
No. Some people remain at high risk despite appropriate care. A claim depends on whether reasonable preventative and treatment measures were missed and whether that caused avoidable harm.
Potentially. The chronology and records may show that care passed between organisations. Responsibility and causation must be assessed on the individual evidence.
Photographs can help document progression, but they are considered alongside clinical notes, care plans, risk assessments and expert evidence.
Yes. A relative can make an initial enquiry, although the correct person to provide instructions or bring a claim depends on the patient’s circumstances.
How risk assessments, repositioning, equipment, wound monitoring and escalation may be reviewed when a pressure sore causes avoidable harm.
Read article →A practical guide to discharge decisions, pending results, medication, follow-up, safety-netting and avoidable harm after leaving hospital.
Read article →What a vaginal mesh claim may examine, including informed consent, surgical care, recognised complications and specialist evidence.
Read article →Use the claim checker if you are unsure where to start.
Tell us what happened and our team can explain the next steps.